>CGI from 1993 is still the best we have ever seen
How?
>CGI from 1993 is still the best we have ever seen
How?
Other urls found in this thread:
It definitely is not. There's 10 year old cgi on tv that bests jurassic park.
>No feathers
It's the combination of practical effects that makes it realistic
>a static object like a spaceship with some shitty cgi clouds around it is the same as a moving dinosaur
nigga pls
the body is cg and head is animatronic.
computers from 1993 are still the same as they are today, numb-nuts.
Because dinosaurs didn't exist, you have no frame of reference for what they look like, so you have no reason to question how good or bad the CGI is.
Because its shot in a way that the lighting compliments the cgi and its paired well with animatronics instead of full cgi. The cgi for the trex took 4 fucking months to complete
1. Most of the impressive shots in JP were real.
2. It's easier to do realistic CGI in darkness and rain.